I have been watching the AI coding tool space pretty closely this year, and honestly, it has been a wild ride. If you are still deciding between Claude Code and Cursor, let me share what I have observed from my own usage and the endless debates in the community.
Claude Code surprised me. It is not just another copilot—it is more like having an actual engineer who can plan, execute, and verify code autonomously. The context window is massive (up to 1M tokens with Sonnet), and it genuinely understands your entire codebase. But here is the thing: token consumption is real. Running Opus 4 for serious work will burn through your budget fast. That is why many devs switched to pairing Claude Code with domestic models like Doubao, GLM, or MiniMax by year-end. The domestic models are not as polished, but they are cheap and iterate quickly.
Cursor still appeals to developers who want that IDE-based experience with real-time code completion. The feedback loop is tighter—you see suggestions as you type. Composer 2.0 helps with multi-file edits. However, the subscription changes Anthropic made to prevent direct model access rubbed a lot of users the wrong way. The rate limits and "you cannot use Claude anymore" situation left a bad taste.
For 2026, my take is domestic tools will dominate the Chinese market simply because of pricing and compliance. Whether Western devs follow that trend, I honestly do not know. Right now I am using Claude Code with GLM 4 for my daily driver. It gives me the best balance between capability and cost.
Top comments (0)